Does this specify the kinds of AI? Are none of these devs using code completion on their IDEs? Or refactoring tools? Because the bulk of them use AI these says.
Even yesteryear’s code completion systems (that didn’t rely on LLMs) are technically speaking, AI systems.
While the term “AI” became the next “crypto” or “Blockchain”, in reality we’ve been using various AI products for the better part of the past 30 years.
We used to call the code that determined NPC behaviour AI.
It wasn’t AI as we know it now but it was intended to give vaguely realistic behaviour (such as taking a sensible route from A to B).
Used to?
Lol gramps here thinks bots are AI skullemoji skullemoji bro
And honestly lightweight neural nets can make for some interesting enemy behavior as well. I’ve seen a couple games using that and wouldn’t be surprised if it caught on in the future.
You mean code completion that just parses a file into an AST and does fuzzy string matching against tokens used to build that AST? I would not personally classify that as AI. It’s code that was written by humans and is perfectly understandable by humans. There is no probabilistic component present, there is no generated matrix, there’s no training process, it’s just simple parsing and string matching.
It’s early and I’m tired and probably in a poor mood and being needlessly fussy, so I apologize if this completely misses the point of your comment. I agree that there’s other stuff we’ve been using for ages which could be reasonably classified as “AI,” but I don’t feel like traditional code completion systems fit there.
AI doesn’t have to be probabilistic, a classical computer science definition of AI states that it has to be an actor that reacts to some percepts according to some policy
“AI” has become synonymous with “Generative AI”
They were technically Expert Systems.
AI was was the Marketing Term even then.Now they are LLMs and AI is still the marketing term.
The seal looks like this:
Code completion is probably a gray area.
Those models generally have much smaller context windows, so the energy concern isn’t quite as extreme.
You could also reasonably make a claim that the model is legally in the clear as far as licensing, if the training data was entirely open source (non-attribution, non-share-alike, and commercial-allowed) licensed code. (A big “if”)
All of that to say: I don’t think I would label code-completion-using anti-AI devs as hypocrites. I think the general sentiment is less “what the technology does” and more “who it does it to”. Code completion, for the most part, isn’t deskilling labor, or turning experts into chatbot-wrangling accountability sinks.
Like, I don’t think the Luddites would’ve had a problem with an artisan using a knitting frame in their own home. They were too busy fighting against factories locking children inside for 18-hour shifts, getting maimed by the machines or dying trapped in a fire. It was never the technology itself, but the social order that was imposed through the technology.
Lovely writing, I agree 👍
I would primarily understand it as being free of generative AI (picture and sound), which is what is most obvious when actually playing a game. I’m personally not against using LLMs for coding if you actually know what you’re doing and properly review the output. However at that point most will come to the conclusion that you could write the code manually anyways and probably save time.
Using ai to generate samples to get a framework of the product would be permitted or not? Is placeholder generation allowed?
Here is a frog, please help me split its hairs
Jesus fuck that’s some goal post moving.
Personally speaking I don’t care at all about dev tools, as they have always been used. Vibe coding does bother me though - if you don’t know HOW to code, you probably shouldn’t be doing it.
The real issue though is using AI generated assets. If you have a game that uses human made art, story, and music, no one is going to complain about you using AI. Even if you somehow managed to get there via vibe coding.
deleted by creator
I don’t consider
clangtools to be AI.They parse the code logically and don’t do blind pattern matching and curve fitting.
The rules they use are properly defined in code.If that was AI, then all compilers made with LLVM would be AI.
This is exactly my thoughts. You need to specify. Is a product AI when Windows is used to develop it? Windows is an “AI” product as in assisted to be produced by AI.
Labels are meaningless without sensible rules and enforcement.
Another case of Lemmy users angrily downvoting because they don’t understand how the world works. These are exactly the questions that need to be asked.
Right now, I could slap the label “AI free” on my completely AI generated game and just claim that I interprete it as "the game doesn’t use gen AI while running.
Removed by mod
When everyone else is selling poison, selling something actually edible is a pretty good move.
AI free art (aka theft free art) is like cruelty free cotton. A lot of people do, and should, care.
You tout a 80 dollar price, entirely ignoring that indie games are often sub-40. Nice ragebait.
Lmao what is this comment?
Are you really conflating the idea that people want art made by people with racism and hard-right politics?
Well Hitler was a painter, checkmate liberals.
Yeah he also had a single testicle, what’s your point?
Edit: I’m a dipshit, that’s a different user. Probably just shitposting XP
You’re not a dipshit. I AM a dipshit
He was a Dew.
I actually got doxing/threats of physical violence here on lemmy for pushing back on idiots claiming being against AI was like being racist, these people are insufferable and no matter what they think their intentions are, the consequences of their ideology is a sweeping under the rug of actual injustice, systematic prejudice and violence.
No one wants AI slop.
Y’all don’t realize how much of a bubble you’re in on the anti - AI front, the vast majority of normies are catching on and use genAI
Tech bros, for some reason always trying to use group pressure as a legitimate argument.
That’s literally what the comment above it was doing too though. It’s a very common anti-AI argument to appeal to social proof.
I’m not even advocating, I’m just trying to inform you people who are clearly in a bubble thinking everyone hates AI, they don’t and that became crystal clear at my recent family gatherings as the one tech guy.
Since we’re sharing anecdotes, everyone at my recent family gathering was staunchly against AI and I’m the only tech person in it.
Being anti AI doesn’t mean you’re in some isolated bubble.
I think Lemmy in particular has a bad problem of assumed group think, it makes sense since most of us left prior platforms for freedom and decentralization reasons, stuff like boycotting major companies, switching to Linux, etc all of that is much less prevalent then some very vocal people on Lemmy think.
I’m glad you had a different experience, but I see AI use increasing all around me by otherwise nontechy people, whereas I get on Lemmy and you know what the majority of the opinion is here.
This is still “you’re the minority, better follow the herd, just saying”.
No, it’s “you all seem to think everyone else also hates AI, but they don’t” it was directly in response to the comment “no one wants AI slop.”
Thank you for your concern.
“Normies” are idiots. They’re the same people denying the efficacy of vaccines or the veracity of the moon landing. What they do should NOT be used to validate the correctness of something.
That entire statement is a lie. Antivaxers and other conspiracy nuts are just as tiny a minority as the Lemmy bubble. If you want to discredit the “normies”, at least use arguments that are actually true.
Ah yes hand waive away everything you don’t like as idiots who deny vaccines and the moon landing.
I am talking about normal normies, not fringe conspiracy normies.
Imagine thinking that disliking AI is racist, or a class war wedge issue.
deleted by creator
